|
|
||||||||
University of California San Francisco, Center for AIDS Prevention Studies 94105, USA. bwoods@psg.ucsf.edu
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated attitudes toward name-based reporting of HIV. METHODS: One hundred thirty high-risk, male repeat testers received information on the public health benefits of name-based reporting and reported their intentions to test. RESULTS: Of the 67 men who were randomly selected and asked their intentions before hearing the benefits, 63% said they would not test if reporting were required. After hearing the benefits, 19% changed their minds (P < .014). Of the 63 men who were asked only after hearing the benefits, 44% would not test. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing name-based reporting without working before-hand to change attitudes could undermine the benefits of both testing and HIV surveillance.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. S Muula and J. M Mfutso-Bengo Important but Neglected Ethical and Cultural Considerations in the Fight Against HIV/AIDS in Malawi Nursing Ethics, September 1, 2004; 11(5): 479 - 488. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. C. Jayaraman, J. K. Preiksaitis, and B. Larke Mandatory reporting of HIV infection and opt-out prenatal screening for HIV infection: effect on testing rates Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 18, 2003; 168(6): 679 - 682. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D. Fortenberry, M. McFarlane, A. Bleakley, S. Bull, M. Fishbein, D. M. Grimley, C. K. Malotte, and B. P. Stoner Relationships of Stigma and Shame to Gonorrhea and HIV Screening Am J Public Health, March 1, 2002; 92(3): 378 - 381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |